Q: What was your reaction to the Obama administration’s decision to increase support to French and African troops in CAR?

Chris Coyne: Given what I know, it is very predictable. For the past several months the U.S. has been pushing back on UN intervention because of the cost of UN peacekeeping missions. I believe the U.S. would have to pay somewhere in the range of 27 percent of the costs of the peacekeeping mission based on the formula the UN uses. This push back occurred despite the fact that violence was already in full effect and well known. So one way to read the U.S. commitment of resources is as a relatively cheap way to placate the growing push for the UN to intervene. Making a lump sum payment to “support” French and African troops is cheaper than paying a percentage of a very costly peacekeeping mission. People keep pointing out how the U.S. has no strategic or economic interests so that this is purely a morally-based assistance. But in my review the push back by the Obama administration over the past several months shows that it is not about some higher moral principle, but responding to political incentives (cost of UN peacekeeping mission vs. lump-sum payment).

Q: This is an extremely limited intervention compared to other recent actions (Balkans, Libya, etc.). What difference might this make?

CC: Well, the U.S. has limited exposure right now. The worst case scenario is that $100 million is lost or wasted. In the scheme of things this is not much money and U.S. citizens won’t even know about it. Best case some kind of peace is established and then the U.S. government can take partial credit for supporting the effort. More broadly, beyond the U.S., right now the goal of the intervention seems to be to achieve some semblance of peace. But from everything I have read it isn’t that easy. Like most conflicts similar to this this there are no clear “good” or “bad” sides. Further, both sides have weaponry. So there are no clear victims and criminals. In my view, the worst case would be if mission creep sets in and peacekeeping becomes nation building.

Q: Have humanitarian interventions of this sort worked in the past? What does the record say?

CC: The record is mixed. A big problem with the attempts to “measure” success is that different people have different definitions of success. There is an existing academic literature that looks at peacekeeping missions and judges success based on whether there is a reoccurrence of conflict. In the literature these are referred to as “traditional peacekeeping” missions since they are relatively narrow and not focused on things like nation building, elections, etc.

The empirical literature finds that traditional peacekeeping missions are effective in preventing conflict if they take place after a ceasefire has already been negotiated by the parties involved. “After” is the key word because there is evidence that peacekeeping missions that take place before a ceasefire is negotiated has no effect (or a negative effect). Since there is no preexisting ceasefire in CAR, the existing empirical literature would seem to indicate that achieving sustainable peace will be difficult.

Q: What do you expect to come out of the increasingly interventionist approach from the U.S., France, neighboring African countries, and the international community?

CC: I can only speculate, but I predict continued violence and continued “outrage” by the international community. I believe the UN is calling for a peacekeeping force in the range of 7,000-9,000 troops. Right now there are about 1,600 French troops there. Some humanitarian aid will be delivered but this isn’t surprising — if you spend $100 million, some aid is bound to get there, right? More broadly, I expect lots of “discussion” by the “international community” about the need for “political will” to respond not just to the CAR situation, but future situations as well.

The international version of the game called Bailout is similar to the domestic version in that the overall objective is to have the taxpayers cover the defaulted loans so that interest payments can continue going to the banks. The differences are: (1) instead of justifying this as protecting the American public, the pretense is that it is to save the world from poverty; and (2) the main money pipeline goes from the Federal Reserve through the IMF /World Bank. Otherwise, the rules are basically the same.

There is another dimension to the game, however, that involves more than mere profits and scam. It is the conscious and deliberate evolution of the IMF/World Bank into a world central bank with the power to issue a world fiat currency. And that is an important step in an even larger plan to build a true world government within the framework of the United Nations.
Economically strong nations are not candidates for surrendering their sovereignty to a world government. Therefore, through "loans" that will never be paid back, the IMF /World Bank directs the massive transfer of wealth from the industrialized nations to the less developed nations. This ongoing process eventually drains their economies to the point where they also will be in need of assistance. No longer capable of independent action, they will accept the loss of sovereignty in return for international aid.
The less developed countries, on the other hand, are being brought into The New World Order along an entirely different route. Many of these countries are ruled by petty tyrants who care little for their people except how to extract more taxes from them without causing a revolt. Loans from the IMF/World Bank are used primarily to perpetuate themselves and their ruling parties in power—and that is exactly what the IMF/World Bank intends. Rhetoric about helping the poor notwithstanding, the true goal of the transfer of wealth disguised as loans is to get control over the leaders of the less developed countries. After these despots get used to the taste of such an unlimited supply of sweet cash, they will never be able to break the habit. They will be content—already are content—to become little gold-plated cogs in the giant machinery of world government. Ideology means nothing to them: capitalist, communist, socialist, fascist, what does it matter so long as the money keeps coming. The IMF/World Bank literally is buying these countries and using our money to do it.
The recent inclusion of Red China and the former Soviet bloc on the list of IMF /World Bank recipient countries signals the final phase of the game. Now that Latin America and Africa have been "purchased" into the New World Order, this is the final frontier. In a relatively short time span, China, Russia, and the Eastern European countries have now become the biggest borrowers and, already, they are in arrears on their payments. This is where the action will lie in the months ahead.

While the top leaders and theoreticians at the IMF and World Bank dream of world socialism, the middle managers and political rulers have more immediate goals in mind. The bureaucracy enjoys a plush life administering the process, and the politicians on the receiving end obtain wealth and power. Ideology is not their concern. Socialism, capitalism, fascism, it makes no difference to them as long as the money flows.
Graham Hancock has been an astute observer of the international-aid "industry" and has attended their plush conferences. He knows many of the leading players personally. In his book, Lords of Poverty, he speaks of the IMF's Structural-Adjustment loans:
Corrupt Ministers of Finance and dictatorial Presidents from Asia, Africa, and Latin America are tripping over their own expensive footwear in their unseemly haste to "get adjusted." For such people, money has probably never been easier to obtain than it is today; with no complicated projects to administer and no messy accounts to keep, the venal, the cruel and the ugly are laughing literally all the way to the bank. For them structural adjustment is like a dream come true. No sacrifices are demanded of them personally. All they have to do—amazing but true—is screw the poor, and they've already had plenty of practice at that.1
In India, the World Bank funded the construction of a dam that displaced two million people, flooded 360 square miles, and wiped out 81,000 acres of forest cover. In Brazil, it spent a billion dollars to "develop" a part of the Amazon basin and to fund a series of hydroelectric projects. It resulted in the deforestation of an area half the size of Great Britain and has caused great human suffering because of resettlement. In Kenya, the Bura irrigation scheme caused such desolation that a fifth of the native population abandoned the land. The cost was $50,000 per family served. In Indonesia, the transmigration program mentioned previously has devastated tropical forests—at the same time that the World Bank is funding reforestation projects. The cost of resettling one family is $7,000, which is about ten-times the Indonesian per-capita income.
Livestock projects in Botswana led to the destruction of grazing land and the death of thousands of migratory animals. This resulted in the inability of the natives to obtain food by hunting, forcing them into dependence on the government for survival. While Nigeria and Argentina are drowning in debt, billions from the World Bank have gone into building lavish new capital cities to house government agencies and the ruling elite. In Zaire, Mexico, and the Philippines, political leaders became billionaires while receiving World Bank loans on behalf of their nations. In the Central African Republic, IMF and World Bank loans were used to stage a coronation for its emperor.
The record of corruption and waste is endless. But the real eye-opener is in the failure of socialist ventures, those magnificent projects which were to bring prosperity to the underdeveloped countries.

While the top leaders and theoreticians at the IMF and World Bank dream of world socialism, the middle managers and political rulers have more immediate goals in mind. The bureaucracy enjoys a plush life administering the process, and the politicians on the receiving end obtain wealth and power. Ideology is not their concern. Socialism, capitalism, fascism, it makes no difference to them as long as the money flows.

I really think that it is simply interview alone is not necessarily the most accurate information, but we want to know. I do not know the dynamics of how they received assistance but is indeed amazing things with their

The dynamics of how they received assistance is a revelation in Converting money into failure.Before receiving loans from the World Bank, Tanzania was not wealthy, but it fed its own people, and it had economic growth.

After receiving more than 3 billion dollars in loans, it nationalized the nation's farms and industries and converted every business into
a government agency. It built a truck assembly plant, a tire factory,
electronic factories, highways, ports, railways, and dams. Tanza
nia's industrial production and agricultural output fell by almost one-third. Food was the main export in 1966. Under socialism, food had to be imported—paid for by foreign aid and more loans from the World Bank. The country is hopelessly in debt with no way to repay.
Argentina once had one of the highest standards of living in Latin America. But then it became the recipient of massive loans from the World Bank as well as commercial banks in the United States. Since the money was given to politicians, it was used to build the only system politicians know how to build: socialism. By 1982, the Gross National Product was in a nose dive, manufacturing had fallen to less than half of capacity, thousands of privately owned companies had been forced into bankruptcy, unemployment was soaring, and so was welfare. By 1989, inflation was running at an average of 5,000% and, in the summer of that year, topped at 1,000,000%! Banks were offering interest rates of 600% per month in hopes of keeping deposits from being moved out of the country. People were rioting in the streets for food, and the government was blaming greedy shop owners for raising prices. The nation was hopelessly in debt with no way to repay.
Brazil is run by the military, and the state controls the economy. Government-owned companies consume 65% of all industrial investment, which means that the private sector is limited to 35% and is shrinking. The government used loans from U.S. banks to create an oil company, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A., which became Latin America's largest corporation. Despite huge oil deposits and record-high oil prices, the company operated at a loss and was not even able to produce enough gasoline for its own citizens. By 1990, inflation was running at 5,000%. Since 1960, its prices had risen to 164,000 times their original level. A new crime was invented called "hedging against inflation," and people were arrested for charging the free-market price for their goods and for using dollars or gold as money. Led by Communist organizers, mobs roamed the streets shouting "We're hungry. Steal what you will!" The nation was hopelessly in debt with no way to repay.

Replying to Minecraft jugar
The experience in Mexico was a carbon copy of that in Brazil, except that the amount of money was larger. When the world's fourth largest oil reserves were discovered, Mexican politicians reached for the brass ring. With billions borrowed from U.S. banks, they launched Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and soon became the
world's fifth largest oil producer. They also built chemical plants
and railroads, and launched many other industrial projects. These were run as welfare agencies instead of businesses: too many people on the payroll, too many managers, excessive salaries, too many holidays, and unrealistic benefits. The ventures floundered and lost money. Private businesses failed by the thousands, and unemployment rose. The government increased the minimum wage causing more businesses to fail and more unemployment. That led to more welfare and unemployment benefits. To pay for that, the government borrowed even more and began creating its own fiat money. Inflation destroyed what was left of the economy.
Price controls were next, along with rent and food subsidies, and doubling the minimum wage. By 1982, Mexicans were trading their pesos for dollars and sending their savings out of the country, as the peso became all but worthless in commerce. 1 In 1981, the average wage for Mexican workers was 31% of the average wage for Americans. By 1989, it had fallen to 10%. Mexico, once one of the major food exporters in the world, was now required to import millions of dollars worth of food grains. This required still more money and more loans. All this occurred while oil prices were high and production was booming. A few years later, when oil prices fell, the failures and shortfalls became even more dramatic.
In 1995, Mexico's bank loans were once again on the brink of default, and, once again, U.S. taxpayers were thrown into the breach by Congress to cover more than $30 billion at risk. Although this loan was eventually repaid, the money to do so was extracted from the Mexican people through another round of massive inflation, which plunged their standard of living even lower. The nation is now hopelessly mired in socialism. The Communist Party, promising "reform" and still more 'socialism, is attracting a large following and could become a potent political force.
1. The same American banks that were making the loans were soliciting this flight capital and ended up getting deposits of the same money they had lent. It was nice business both ways.

Thus, the saga continues. After pouring billions of dollars into underdeveloped countries around the globe, no development has taken place. In fact, we have seen just the opposite. Most countries are worse off than before the Saviors of the World got to them.

phil

This article is about humanitarian assistance. It is very balanced :" More broadly, I expect lots of "discussion" by the "international community" about the need for "political will" to respond not just to the CAR situation, but future situations as well". I see that the discussion is dominated by talk of the World/Bank, IMF, loans to Brazil, Mexico etc…with the conclusion that all aid is ineffective, and even worse, promotes…socialism, price control etc.. . Is there then no room ever for humanitarian assistance ? Is there any organization such as UNICEF, WHO, UNHCR, the Red Cross, etc… that need to be supported? And how these humanitarian organizations work if there is a civil war?

Peter Palms

Are you referring to donations or loans.Secretary of Donald Regan in he Reagan Administration in a cabinet meeting in the Spring of 1982 asked "does anyone believe that the less developed countries will ever be able to pay back the principal on these loans?" When No one spoke up, I asked " if the loans are never going to be repaid why should we again bail out the countries and arrange payment for their interest" The answer came from several voices at once "If we don't arrange for their interest payments on loans, the loans will go into default, and it could put American banks in jeopardy. "Would the customers lose their money?" No came the answer but the stockholders might loose their dividends In amazement I leaned back in my large leather chair, only two seats from the President of the United States. iI realized that nothing in the world could keep these high government officials from scrambling to protect and bail out a few very large and troubled American banks. If they are donations do they come from the budget of the U.N. funded by the American taxpayers rather than voluntary contributions.

PeterPalms

The less developed countries, are being brought into The New World Order along an entirely different route. Many of these countries are ruled by petty tyrants who care little for their people . Donations used primarily to perpetuate themselves and their ruling parties in power—and that is exactly what the IMF/World Bank intends. Rhetoric about helping the poor notwithstanding, the true goal of the transfer of donations is to get control over the leaders of the less developed countries. After these despots get used to the taste of such an unlimited supply of sweet cash, they will never be able to break the habit. They will be content—already

Can we not use the term "humanitarian" to refer to the US government, in any way?

You know very well Obama is backing a bloody coup in Egypt, supporting child torture in Bahrain, sending over 60 billion dollars of weapons to Saudi Arabia, who then funnels them to jihadists in Syria, and probably to the Taliban, as well.

You know Obama has vetoed at least 28 UN resolutions condemning Israel or calling for justice for the Palestinians.

You know Obama has come up with a new way of never letting the Chagossians return to their home island, which the USA ethnically cleansed them from, and which Obama enjoys using for himself as a factory for blowing up and likely torturing human beings. He's calling it a "marine reserve", as revealed by Wikileaks, which conveniently disallows the Chagossians to return, but allows Obama's murderers to remain.

You know Obama supports the chemical weapons slaughter of Gazans by Israel and Israel's ethnic cleansing. Obama has called for huge increases in US tax money going to Israel.

You know Obama hasn't ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Children, but the other two holdouts, Somalia and South Sudan, now have.

The man is a freak. And the word "humanitarian" can appear near his name without the prefix "anti"?

Humanitarianism is NOT a motive of the Obama regime, or governments in general.

eric siverson

I have no faith in any United Nations , NATO or the United States interventions . We are on the wrong side more often than not . These organization no longer share my beliefs on right and wrong . I don't think they Share most Americans beliefs This is just another example of our government grossly subverting the US constitution again . I believe Foreign aid should be food not bullets to establish a independent democracy in a small part of a foreign country ..

Your remarks are accurate. I also believe the American electorate, the people, have lost control of their Government which feigns a two party system. It is operated by the CFR through the Fed which produces Rederal reserve Notes for congress and owns it.

the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as mechanisms for eliminating gold from world finance; the hidden agenda behind the IMF/World Bank revealed as the building of world socialism; the role of the Federal Reserve in bringing that about. The International Monetary Fund appears to be a part of the United Nations, much as the Federal Reserve System appears to be a part of the United States government, but it is entirely independent. One of the routine operations at the IMF is to exchange worthless currencies for dollars so the weaker countries can pay their international bills. This is supposed to cover temporary "cash-flow" problems. It is a kind of international FDIC which rushes money to a country that has gone bankrupt so it can avoid devaluing its currency. The transactions are seldom paid back. Which means the IMF must fall back to the "reserves," back to the "assets," back to the "credits," and eventually back to the taxpayers to bail them out.

Whereas the International Monetary Fund is evolving into a world central bank which eventually will issue a world currency based on nothing, its sister organization, the World Bank, has become its lending agency. Acting as Savior of the World, it seeks to aid the underdeveloped nations, to feed the hungry, and to bring a better life to all mankind. In pursuit of these humanitarian goals, it provides loans to governments at favorable terms, usually at rates below market, for terms as long as fifty years, and often with no payments due until after ten years.
Funding for these loans comes from member states in the form of a small amount of cash, plus promises to deliver about ten-times more if the Bank gets into trouble. The promises, described as "callable capital," constitute a kind of FDIC insurance program but with no pretense at maintaining a reserve fund. (In that sense it is more honest than the real FDIC which does maintain the pretense but, in reality, is based on nothing more than a similar promise.)
Based upon the small amount of seed money plus the far greater amount of "credits" and "promises" from governments of the industrialized countries, the World Bank is able to go into the commercial loan markets and borrow larger sums at extremely low interest rates. After all, the loans are backed by the most powerful governments in the world which have promised to force their taxpayers to make the payments if the Bank should get into trouble. It then takes these funds and relends them to the underdeveloped countries at slightly higher rates, making a profit on the arbitrage.
The unseen aspect of this operation is that the money it processes is money which, otherwise, would have been available for investment in the private sector or as loans to consumers. It siphons off much-needed development capital for private industry, prevents new jobs from being created, causes interest rates to rise, and retards the economy at large.

FINANCING CORRUPTION AND DESPOTISM
Nowhere is this pattern more blatant than in Africa. Julius Nyerere, the dictator of Tanzania, is notorious for his "villagization" program in which the army has driven the peasants from their land, burned their huts, and loaded them like cattle into trucks for relocation into government villages. The purpose is to eliminate opposition by bringing everyone into compounds where they can be watched and controlled. Meanwhile the economy staggers, farms have gone to weed, and hunger is commonplace. Yet, Tanzania has received more aid per capita from the World Bank than any other nation.
In Uganda, government security forces have engaged in mass detentions, torture, and killing of prisoners. The same is true under the terrorist government in Zimbabwe. Yet, both regimes continue to be the recipients of millions of dollars in World Bank funding.
Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia) is a classic case. After its independence, the leftist government nationalized (confiscated) many of the farms previously owned by white settlers. The most desirable of these lands became occupied by the government's senior ruling-party officials, and the rest were turned into state-run collectives. They were such miserable failures that the workers on

these farmlands were, themselves, soon begging for food. Not daunted by these failures, the socialist politicians announced in 1991 that they were going to nationalize half of the remaining farms as well. And they barred the courts from inquiring into how much compensation would be paid to their owners.
The IMF was represented in Zimbabwe at the time by Michel Camdessus, the Governor of the central Bank of France, and a former finance minister in Francois Mitterrand's Socialist government. After being informed of Zimbabwe's plan to confiscate additional land and to resettle people to work on those lands, Camdessus agreed to a loan valued at 42 billion rands with full knowledge that much of it would be used for the resettlement project.
Perhaps the worst violations of human rights have occurred in Ethiopia under the Marxist regime of Mengistu Haile Mariam. The famine of 1984-85, which threatened the lives of millions of people, was the result of government nationalization and disruption of agriculture. Massive resettlement programs have torn hundreds of thousands of people from their privately owned land in the north and deported them to concentration-camp "villages" in the south, complete with guard towers. A report by a French voluntary medical-assistance group, Doctors without Borders, reveals that the forced resettlement program may have killed as many people as the famine itself.

1.Commercial banks in the industrialized nations, backed by their respective central banks, create money out of nothing and lend it to the governments of underdeveloped nations. They know that these are risky loans, so they charge an interest rate that is high enough to compensate. It is more than what they expect to receive in the long run.
2.When the underdeveloped nations cannot pay the interest on their loans, the IMF and World Bank enter the game as both players and referees. Using additional money created out of nothing by the central b&lks of their member nations, they advance "development" loans to the governments which now have enough to pay the interest on the original loans with enough left over for their own political purposes.
3.The recipient country quickly exhausts the new supply of money, and the play returns to point number two. This time, however, the new loans are guaranteed by the World Bank and the central banks of the industrialized nations. Now that the risk of default is removed, the commercial banks agree to reduce the interest to the point anticipated at the beginning. The debtor governments resume payments.
4. The final play is — well, in this version of the game there appears to be no final play, because the plan is to keep the game going forever. To make that possible, certain things must happen that are very final, indeed. They include the conversion of the IMF into a world central bank as Keynes had planned, which then issues an international fiat money. Once that "Bank of Issue" is in place, the IMF can collect unlimited resources from the citizens of the world through the hidden tax called inflation. The money stream then can be sustained indefinitely—with or without the approval of the separate nations—because they will no longer have money of their own.
Since this game results in a hemorrhage of wealth from the industrialized nations, their economies are doomed to be brought down further and further, a process that has been going on since Bretton Woods. The result will be a severe lowering of their living standards and their demise as independent nations. The hidden reality behind so-called development loans is that America and other industrialized nations are being subverted by that process. That is not an accident; it is the essence of the plan. A strong nation is not likely to surrender its sovereignty. Americans would not agree to turn over their monetary system, their military, or their courts to a world body made up of governments which have been despotic to their own people, especially since most of those regimes have already revealed anti-American hostility. But if Americans can be brought to the point where they are suffering from a collapse of their economy and from a breakdown in civil order, things will be different. When they stand in bread lines and face anarchy in their streets, they will be more willing to give up sovereignty in return for "assistance" from the World Bank and the UN "peacekeeping" forces. This will become even more acceptable if a structured demise of Communism can be arranged ahead of time to make it appear that the world's major political systems have converged into the common denominator of "social democracy."

The underdeveloped nations, on the other hand, are not being raised up. What is happening to them is that their political leaders are becoming addicted to the IMF cash flow and will be unable to
break the habit. These countries are being conquered by money instead of arms. Soon they will no longer be truly independent nations. They are becoming mere components in the system of world socialism planned by Harry Dexter White and John Maynard Keynes. Their leaders are being groomed to become potentates in a new, high-tech feudalism, paying homage to their Lords in New York. And they are eager to do it in return for privilege and power within the "New World Order." That is the final play.

The essence of socialism is redistribution of the wealth. The goal is equality, and that means taking from the rich and giving to the poor. At least that's the theory. Unfortunately, the poor are never benefited by this maneuver. They either do not get the money in the first place—too much is siphoned off by the bureaucracies which administer the programs—or, if they do get any of it, they don't know what to do with it. They merely spend it until it is gone, and then no one has any money— except, of course, those who administer the government programs. Nevertheless, politicians know that promises to redistribute the wealth are popular among two groups: the voters who naively believe it will help the poor, and the socialist managers who see it as job security. Supported by these two voting blocs, election to office is assured.
One of the early American advocates of socialism on a global scale—including the draining of wealth away from the "rich" United States—was John F. Kennedy. He undoubtedly learned the concept while attending the Fabian London School of Economics in 1935-36 just prior to his father's appointment as Ambassador to England. When JFK became President, his political views continued to carry the imprint of that training. In September of 1963, he addressed the finance ministers and central-bank governors from 102 nations at the annual meeting of the IMF/World Bank. He explained the concept of world socialism in glowing terms:
Twenty years ago, when the architects of these institutions met to design an international banking structure, the economic life of the world was polarized in overwhelming, and even alarming, measure on the United States…. Sixty per cent of the gold reserves of the world were here in the United States…. There was a need for redistribution of the financial resources of the world…. And there was an equal need to organize a flow of capital to the impoverished countries of the world. All this has come about. It did not come about by chance but by conscious and deliberate and responsible planning.

CFR SETS STRATEGY
The brain trust for implementing the Fabian plan in America is called the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). We shall look at it closely in future chapters, but it is important to know at this point that almost all of America's leadership has come from this small group. That includes our presidents and their advisers, cabinet members, ambassadors, board members of the Federal Reserve System, directors of the largest banks and investment houses, presidents of universities, and heads of metropolitan newspapers, news services, and TV networks. It is not an exaggeration to describe this group as the hidden government of the United States. CFR members have never been shy about calling for the weakening of America as a necessary step toward the greater good of building world government. One of the CFR founders was John Foster Dulles, who later was appointed Secretary-of-State by CFR member Dwight Eisenhower. In 1939, Dulles said:
Some dilution or leveling off of the sovereignty system as it prevails in the world today must take place … to the immediate disadvantage of those nations which now possess the preponderance of power…. The establishment of a common money … would deprive our government of exclusive control over a national money…. The United States must be prepared to make sacrifices afterward in setting up a world politico-economic order which would level off inequalities of economic opportunity with respect to nations."
CFR member Zbigniew Brzezinski was the National Security Adviser to CFR member Jimmy Carter. In 1970, Brzezinski wrote:
… some international cooperation has already been achieved, but further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable American position.

Indian Railways has the largest railway network, and it is also one of the busiest in the world carrying over 16 million passengers every day. Additionally, the railway also carries irctc pnr status
more than a million tonnes of freight, and to support this, it has more than 1.6 million employees employed on a permanent basis. In fact, the Chinese Army is the only entity that has more employees in terms of size, and work carried out.

10 digit number that is printed on the left side of the ticket (including e-tickets) and is considered as the basic reference point. indian railway pnr status A number of tickets can be booked together for the same train and journey with a single PNR.

Initially this concept was used by airline industry to irctc pnr status exchange reservation information in case of traveler needed flights of multiple airlines in order to arrive their desired destination.

IRCTC, Indian Railways Tourism Department, budget and luxury packaging to both domestic and foreign tourists trips are organized. pointpnr status One of the most popular for the budget traveler Bharat Darshan holiday packages, travel is a major tourist destination. pnr status The packet must be completed in advance to book your railway. Book tours railway, tourists get luxury travel destinations of choice for some of the Deccan Odyssey, Palace on Wheels, Royal Orient Express luxury train, which can be selected.

currently a toll and reduce interference between men and officers . This can easily be done irctc pnr status in the comfort of your home for a long period of waiting to book tickets since there are queues. Passenger Name Record is used as an abbreviation of the NRP. Note the name of the computer reservation system (CRS ) of the huge database that includes comprehensive information on the registration of passenger travel . pnr status Inspection to verify the status of a railway ticket , which includes a large number of 10 digits. Passenger backrest , which was determined to see pnr status the list of train tickets at a standstill, or RAC ( reservation in case of cancellation ) can be achieved.

asy

Do you need a Loan?
Are you looking for Finance?
Are you looking for a Loan to enlarge your business?
I think you have come to the right place.
We offer Loans at low interest rate.
Interested people should please contact us on
For immediate response to your application, Kindly
reply to this emails below onlyeasyloanoffer1@gmail.com

Do you need a Loan?
Are you looking for Finance?
Are you looking for a Loan to enlarge your business?
I think you have come to the right place.
We offer Loans atlow interest rate.
Interested people should please contact us on
For immediate response to your application, Kindly
reply to this emails below only:easyloanoffer1@gmail.com

Please, do provide us with the Following information if interested.
1) Full Name:………
2) Gender:………
3) Loan Amount Needed:………
4) Loan Duration:………
5) Country:………
6) Home Address:………
7) Mobile Number:………
8)Monthly Income:…………………
9)Occupation:………………………
)Which site did you here about us…………………
Thanks and Best Regards.easyloanoffer1@gmail.com

This is my first opportunity to visit this website. I found some interesting things and I will apply to the development of my blog. Thanks for sharing useful information…Game of War – Fire Age Cheats

AsharSeo

Obama is backing a bloody coup in Egypt, supporting child torture in Bahrain, sending over 60 billion dollars of weapons to Saudi Arabia, who then funnels them to jihadists in Syria, and probably to the Taliban, as well. buy instagram followers | instagram likes

He knows many of the leading players personally. In his book, Lords of Poverty, he speaks of the IMF's Structural-Adjustment loans: bike transport pune

AsharSeo

The waiting Anthony Oliver, who hits a game-sealing three pointer. Oliver runs down the court laughing to himself like a man who absolutely cannot believe his miraculous good fortune.instagram get more followers

AsharSeo

I have to search sites with relevant information on given topic and provide them to teacher our opinion and the article ????? ???????

David John SEO

The waiting Anthony Oliver, who hits a game-sealing three pointer. Tolliver runs down the court laughing to himself like a man who absolutely cannot believe his miraculous good fortune….link Building

David John SEO

Its a great pleasure reading your post.Its full of information I am looking for and I love to post a comment that "The content of your post is awesome" Great work. do follow backlinks

Tommy

This is a good post. This post gives truly quality information. I’m definitely going to look into it. Really very useful tips are provided here. Thank you so much. Keep up the good works. worldofgames4u.com